Because we still don't have one. Here is my opinion: If a person is dying and needs a blood transfusion, no one can force me to give my blood even if it means certain death to another person. NO ONE CAN FORCE ME TO SAVE THE LIFE OF FULL GROWN-UP PERSON. There will be no lasting harm caused to me and in three months my body will have totally recovered the given blood. Yet, I can't be forced. Why? Because people have body autonomy. It's this concept that a person's body belongs to the person and the person has full autonomy over it. If a person dies and she didn't allow her organs to be donated, it's illegal to donate them. You can't violate a corpse's body autonomy. You can't save several lives with these organs unless the person in question gave authorization before dying. I really don't see why a woman has less rights than a corpse. I really don't see why she has to give up her autonomy for nine months for something that is not even definitely alive and that it's not definitely human. Denying abortion is basically saying that CORPSES HAVE MORE RIGHT THAN WOMEN. @P1louxxx I tried to edit the other thread, but it kept going on bad gateway and 404, so I made a new one. EDIT: My main point here is that people are allowed to control what they do to save another life. Whether a baby is considered alive or not, part of her body or not, it doesn't change the fact that denying a pregnant woman abortion is special pleading toward A CORPSE. A mother is not obligated to donate blood to save his child if she, a mother is not forced to donate her organs to a child if the former dies. So why are mothers forced to have babies against their will? I really don't see any logical reason behind it.